Ok, so I’ve just spent some time reading the Rio+20 ‘Future we want’ draft text.

I was curious to see why the document was disappointing to some, considering it was better than leaving empty-handed, as in COP15/Copenhagen. Also, why was it ready and adopted before everyone had arrived? (G8 leaders – Germany, UK, and Russia did not even attend. Apparently Mr. Cameron believed it was not a good idea to be out of the country for so long; since the week before world leaders attended G20 in Mexico.)

So why all the fuss?

This summit comes 20 years after Rio Conference/Earth Summit and its outcome – Agenda 21 action plan and the Rio declaration. These documents were not legally binding, yet they were a stepping stone – as sustainability became from that moment onwards a formal political principle.

Some might argue that in comparison, the Rio+20 document (as it stands today) does not achieve much.

However, much has changed since the Earth Summit, including key players and old dynamics.

I only made it up to number 54 out of 283 points of the ‘Future we want’ document.

I have a déjà-vu feeling and I don’t know if it is because of reading and writing a bit on sustainability and public concern/business/politics, for my dissertation Communicating Sustainability Messages – a case study of VisitScotland

or

if it is the result of working for international organisations, reading/writing key words such as “green economy”, “decent work” and verbs “we commit”, “we recognize”, “we reaffirm”, “we support”, “we encourage”… (even WordPress dictionary is suggesting ‘we urge’ instead of ‘we encourage’)

In any case, I could not finish it but I think I grasp the main idea behind the document, the reasons for frustration but also the positive and encouraging side events (obtained less publicity).